Editorial: Both sides earn a 'time out' in Obama vs. Fox feud

Friday

Oct 30, 2009 at 12:01 AMOct 30, 2009 at 12:19 PM

For as long as Barack Obama has been in the national eye, there has been little love lost between him and Fox News Channel. Both the president and the network have traded barbs, with Obama describing them as "entirely devoted to attacking my administration." A hard freeze has now settled in as aides have been making it clear the administration views Fox as anything but a legitimate news outlet.

For as long as Barack Obama has been in the national eye, there has been little love lost between him and Fox News Channel. Both the president and the network have traded barbs, with Obama describing them as "entirely devoted to attacking my administration." A hard freeze has now settled in as aides have been making it clear the administration views Fox as anything but a legitimate news outlet.

To some extent, that's not a surprise. Every president since George Washington has felt that one news agency or another has been personally out to get him. Fox News is simply the latest to get in line - and has been fairly transparent about it. Still, that kind of thing pretty much comes with the territory in politics - not everybody is going to be a fan nor will you think that you're always getting a fair shake. The better leaders - regardless of party - manage to deal with that without resorting to petty, childish squabbles.

But it's recently gone beyond that, with the White House's attempt to shut out Fox reporters from a news event open to all the other media outlets, a briefing last week with administration "pay czar" Kenneth Feinberg. All the other outlets, recognizing an unfair proposition when they saw it - and no doubt realizing that the shoe could one day be on the other foot - refused to begin until Fox reporters were allowed in as well. Kudos to them for defending their press brethren.

Granted, there's nothing wrong with Obama bypassing a network when he does one-on-one interviews. That, too, is part of the game in politics, and the professionals at Fox surely realize it. True, someone who is considered a powerful, persuasive orator, who might have been styled the Great Communicator if Ronald Reagan hadn't earned the title first, ought to have no trouble dealing with doubters and hostile audiences. Heck, he's managed before, confronting a skeptical Islamic audience in Cairo on U.S.-Muslim relations and standing in front of an audience that included hostile protesters during a commencement address at Notre Dame that touched on no less passionate an issue than abortion. But if he doesn't want to personally take a seat in Bill O'Reilly's "No-Spin Zone" again, that's absolutely his call.

Not to say, of course, that Fox hasn't earned the scorn from Obama & Co. We'd hardly attach a "fair and balanced" label to their coverage of him - far from it, in fact. The network consistently blurs the lines between news and commentary, and many loyal viewers certainly take as a given that the reports they see are slanted, catering to those who agree with them rather than those who want to be fully informed. They hardly stand out as untainted purveyors of the complete truth. To be equal opportunity, folks on the right could level the same charges against, say, MSNBC and be equally convincing. (Indeed, some in the administration making the rounds on news shows to defend this spitball fight have quickly changed the subject when that counterpoint is raised.)

But regardless of whether the bias and bad behavior come from the right or from the left, in the end they harm credibility in the same way and do a disservice to viewers - and voters - who deserve better. At this writing, the administration and Fox were reportedly talking, trying to reach a truce. With any luck, both will realize that their reputations are being damaged by their posturing, which has been juvenile enough to merit a stint in "time out." There are far more important national issues at hand, after all.